The story of Sky

stona

SMF Supporter
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
11,455
Points
113
First Name
Steve
Much confusion over this colour.

In the following document about camouflage against the sky the colour Sky is also referred to as duck egg blue,which is not unusual,but is clearly differentiated from another extant colour Sky Blue.

The colour referred to in the document as having been used by Cotton at Heston was called Camotint. This colour is the same as Sky. It was simply renamed as evidenced here.

On June 7th 1940 the order was sent out to change the undersurface colour of RAF fighter aircraft to the new colour Sky. This immiediately caused confusion and it is likely that some squadrons confused Sky and Sky Blue.

A clarification was sent.

Now it turned out that there was not enough of the new colour to go around. Another signal was sent allowing aircraft to operate in the earlier scheme (Black/White halves) until supplies became available.

The suffix "type S" has nothing to do with the colour. It refers to the finish of the paint,in this case smooth (S). Matt finishes were referred to as "type M".

What does all this mean as you paint your Spitfire or Hurricane?

After 7 June 1940 the official colour for the underside was Sky. Some aircraft,already in service seem to have been painted Sky Blue and there is some evidence that a few units had a go at mixing their own version of the new colour. If you are doing an aircraft with some evidence pointing to this then noone can be sure what colour was applied. Some aircraft must have continued operating in the earlier scheme for a time,I doubt this was very long.

There is little photographic evidence,taking a camera onto a frontline fighter station would be a quick way to end up behind bars in 1940!

If you are doing an aircraft produced after 7 June 1940,or one of the majority that received the correct colour,then that colour was Sky.

Cheers

Steve
 
Last edited by a moderator:

stona

SMF Supporter
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
11,455
Points
113
First Name
Steve
\ said:
ot oh hand me a parachute I am leaving.Laurie
Noone is making you read it if you aren't interested. I can just as easily keep it to myself on my HD.

Steve
 
T

tecdes

Guest
\ said:
Noone is making you read it if you aren't interested. I can just as easily keep it to myself on my HD.Steve
No no Steve you have misread me or perhaps it is not well put by me. I can just see me getting in to controversy which lands me invariably in trouble. It is certainly not a dig at you.

Laurie
 

stona

SMF Supporter
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
11,455
Points
113
First Name
Steve
Sorry I blew up Laurie. Sometimes it is easy to misinterpret the written word.

Cheers

Steve
 

Ian M

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
SMF Supporter
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
19,583
Points
113
Location
Falster, Denmark
First Name
Ian
Some interesting stuff there Steve, thanks for sharing.

Only problem is, that now I am going to get even more frustrated when trying to figure out which colour the aircraft I am doing should actually be. Fortunately for me though I rarely go after a specific air frame at a specific time. Hmm maybe I should. kind of force myself into looking into things a bit more.

Thanks again.

Ian M
 
T

tecdes

Guest
\ said:
Sorry I blew up Laurie. Sometimes it is easy to misinterpret the written word.Cheers

Steve
Thanks Steve the way I had written it could be taken both ways not very clear.

Regards

Laurie
 

stona

SMF Supporter
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
11,455
Points
113
First Name
Steve
\ said:
Fortunately for me though I rarely go after a specific air frame at a specific time. Hmm maybe I should. kind of force myself into looking into things a bit more.Ian M
Sometimes it can be tricky but usually only around the times that changes were made,particularly when dealing with UK based front line aircraft. Don't forget that after the introduction of Sky undersides there was a brief period with one wing (port) black with changes to the roundel.

Then there was another change to the Day Fighter Scheme! Thankfully,apart from special markings,that was it

If you start looking at overseas aircraft or special cases like the "Malta Spitfires" or the Hurricanes launched from merchant ships (CAM ships-catapult aircraft merchantman) you will be up to your neck in worms from a very large can :smiling3:

I used to think that RAF aircraft markings were more straight forward than their Luftwaffe counterparts but I'm not so sure these days.

I am currently agonising over the exact form of the "invasion stripes" on Gabreski's last P-47 on the day he crash landed and was taken prisoner.....how sad is that!

Cheers

Steve
 
K

Keith9657

Guest
I'd no idea a pot of paint could get so complicated! An interesting document, Steve. Thaks for posting.

Keith
 

stona

SMF Supporter
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
11,455
Points
113
First Name
Steve
\ said:
I'd no idea a pot of paint could get so complicated! An interesting document, Steve. Thaks for posting.Keith
You're not wrong there!

As far as painting a model goes there is absolutely no point,at least in my opinion,in trying to match a colour from 1940.

All these documents can do is give us an idea of which colour was applicable at a certain time on the original aircraft. At least this way we can REPRESENT the correct camouflage scheme for a given period.

How anyone interprets "Sky" on their model is up to them. I've got a few Sky undersides on my shelves and due to my random lightening and shading no two are exactly the same :smiling3:

Cheers

Steve
 
C

CDW

Guest
\ said:
As far as painting a model goes there is absolutely no point,at least in my opinion,in trying to match a colour from 1940.
this is so true. as said lighting and primer colour plays a great part in the look of the finished paint job.

the main point to make is if you get the same paint and primer from an actual vehicle it will look different on a scale version.

technically making it a waste of time researching and colourmatching the original colour if you look at it logically.
 
Top